I
have previously instructed you concerning your consideration of circumstantial
evidence presented in this case.That
is, you may infer a fact from other facts in the case if you find it more
probable than not that the inferred fact is true.

Evidence
has been presented that a was found in a vehicle.

[Charge whichever inference(s) is/are
appropriate]

[Inference
#1] If you find that defendant was the sole occupant of the vehicle, you
may infer that this occupant possessed the .

[Inference
#2] If you find that the vehicle had more than one occupant, you may infer
that the was possessed by all of the occupants.

[Inference
#3] If you find that the was on the person of one of the occupants, you
may infer that it was possessed by that occupant alone.

[Inference
#4] If you find that the vehicle was not stolen and that the was out of view in a glove compartment, trunk,
or other enclosed customary depository, you may infer that the was possessed by the occupant(s) who owned or
had authority to operate the vehicle.

[Inference
#5] If you find that the vehicle was a taxicab which had passengers and the
was found in the passengers' portion of the
vehicle, you may infer that the was possessed by all of the passengers.If you find that the taxicab had no
passengers, you may infer that the was possessed by the driver.

You
are never required or compelled to draw any inference.It is your exclusive province to determine
whether the facts and circumstances shown by the evidence support any
inferences and you are always free to accept or reject them if you wish.